1 2025:CGHC:54204 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4055 of 2023 1 - Ashish Parashar S/o Pradeep Parashar Aged About 34 Years Address - Shrikrishna Colony, Tansen Road, Police Station Padav, District : Gwalior, Madhya Pradesh 2 - Gajendra Kumar Sahu S/o Gopal Prasad Sahu Aged About 34 Years Address Village Katathih, Post Office Sunder Nagar, District : Raipur, Chhattisgarh 3 - Ashwini Nautiyal S/o Shvani Bhusan Nautiyal Aged About 43 Years Address Pushp Vihar, Post Office Upper Tunwala District Dehradun, Uttakhand. 4 - Poonam W/o Manish Kumar Aged About 35 Years Address B/105, Pearl, Near St. Xaviers School, Avanti Vihar, Raipur, C.G. 5 - Prasadi Kumar Mahto C/o Utpala Mitra Aged About 39 Years Address 19, R G Street Tharpakana, Police Station Lalpur, District : Ranchi, Jharkhand 6 - (Deleted) Bijaya Senapati As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated. 06-07- 2023. 7 - ( Deleted) Soumya Ranjan Mohanty As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated. 06-07-2023. 8 - (Deleted) Mohan Lal Sahu As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated. 06-07- 2023. 9 - (Deleted) Suryakant Behera As Per Hon'ble Court Order Dated. 06- 07-2023. ... Petitioners versus YOGESH TIWARI Digitally signed by YOGESH TIWARI Date: 2025.11.06 19:30:20 +0530 2 1 - Union Of India Through The Secretary, Department Of Empowerment Of Persons With Disabilities (Divyangjan), Ministry Of Social Justice And Empowerment, Government Of India, New Delhi. 2 - The Director National Institute For The Empowerment Of Persons With Intellectual Disabilities (Divyangjan), Manovikas Nagar, Secunderabad. 3 - The Director Composite Regional Centre For Skill Development, Rehabilitation And Empowerment Of Persons With Disabilities, Old District Hospital Campus, Rajnandgaon, Chhattisgarh. ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Mr. Udit Khatri, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Ramayan Yadav, Advocate For Respondents : Ms. Shweta Rai, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Tushar Dhar Diwan, CGC Hon’ble Shri Amitendra Kishore Prasad, Judge Order on Board 06.11.2025 1. The petitioners have prayed for following relief(s) :- “10.1 It is prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly pleased to call for the entire records pertaining to the case of the Petitioners from the possession of the respondents. 10.2 This Hon'ble Court may kindly pleased to issue a writ order/direction quashing the Revised Recruitment rules and terms & conditions for contractual appointment in various NIs/CRCs published vide order dated 04/03/2023 issued by the respondent No. 1, Department of Empowerment of Persons with Disabilities (Divyangjan), Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Government of India, New Delhi. 3 10.3 This Hon'ble Court may kindly pleased to issue a writ order/direction Ministry quashingthe letter for Recruitment/Appointment of staff at various Composite Regional Centre (CRCs) published vide order dated 19/04/2023. 10.4 This Hon'ble Court may kindly pleased to issue a writ order/direction quashing the fresh Recruitment Advertisement for various posts at CRC, Rajnandgaon issued by NIEPID. Secunderabad published vide Employment Notice No:02/2023. 10.5 This Hon'ble Court may further kindly pleased to issue a writ order/direction quashing the letter dated 04/05/2023 issued by NIEPID, Secunderabad with regard to the Extension of Contractual period of the petitioners employed at CRC, Rajnandgaon upto 30.06.2023. 10.6 This Hon'ble Court may kindly pleased to issue further direction to the Repondents to extend the contractual period of the staff of CRC, Rajnandgaon as per the old recruitment rules and terms & conditions. 10.7 Any other relief/reliefs, which this Hon'ble Court may think fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, with cost of the petition, may also please be granted to the petitioner.” 2. From perusal of the prayers made in the writ petition, it transpires that the petitioners have primarily questioned the revised Recruitment Rules and consequential actions undertaken by the respondents, including issuance of fresh advertisements, communications related to recruitment and extension of contractual appointments, and have sought restoration of their contractual engagement in terms of the earlier Recruitment Rules and conditions. 4 3. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents fairly submits that the petitioners have already removed from their services as they have tendered their resignation, as such the relief as prayed by the petitioners cannot be granted to them, to which learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the resignation has been taken forcefully. 4. In view of the aforesaid submissions and considering the nature of dispute raised, this Court is of the considered opinion that the reliefs sought in the present petition cannot be granted in exercise of writ jurisdiction. However, liberty is reserved in favour of the petitioners to avail appropriate remedy before the competent forum, in accordance with law, for redressal of their grievance including the plea regarding alleged forced resignation. 5. With the aforesaid liberty, the writ petition stands disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Yogesh